.223 vs 7.62x39

tc790108

January 31, 2002 09:06

I am in the market for a varmint rifle and due to the availability of ammo I am concidering a Ruger m77 in either .223 or 7.62x39 any Pros or Cons would be appreciated.The only varmint hunting I do is coyote and I am not so much interested in fur just the pratice. I thank all of you for your help.[This message has been edited by tc790108 (edited 02-01-2002).]

0

• 

  reb8600

  January 31, 2002 09:59

  I have a ruger m77 22-250 for varmint and it is a good gun. A little better range with it than the 223.

  ---

  Guncontrol-The ability to hit what your aiming at.

  0
• 

  Kadaver

  January 31, 2002 10:25

  7.62 for varmint?, little big dont ya think???.... .223 should be plenty big

  0
• 

  JustC

  January 31, 2002 10:27

  7.62 doesn't qualify as a varmint load. The 223 is the better choice, if you don't want a 22-250.

  0
• 

  MFI

  January 31, 2002 10:30

  .223 all the way.

  0
• 

  rballi

  January 31, 2002 12:04

  I've been there before. Since you said varmint in your first sentance, I would go for the 223. The 7.62x39 is a decent mid size animal cartridge out to about 125yds effectively, for me, anyway. I have a Rem 788 in 223, and a Contender with a 10" bull, and 21" carbine in 223.I also have a CZ 527 in 7.62x39.I would say the 223 is more accurate for longer more precise shots.

  0
• 

  Big Timber

  January 31, 2002 12:21

  My first choice for varmits would be a 22-250, then .223. 7.62 x 39 for the taliban. Just my $0.02.BT

  0

Please sign in to leave a comment.